The Urban Warrior

I voted AK. They cant be beat as far as reliability. They are cheaper to buy. I also think they fire a more potent round the 7.62x39 ones anyway. I have a converted Saiga and have also owned several other AK's
That being said I do want to build an AR. I think if the SHTF ammo and parts for an AR would be easier to come by. AR's are also known for better accuracy. There should of been a choice for both in the poll lol.

I voted for the AK-47. I know: No surprise for those who know me. But I have my reasons:

The practical.
-One of the most prolific rifles in the world
-Yes, you can't kill them, even with holy water, a young priest and an old priest
-Inaccurate? I think they've proven themselves accurate enough. Quality of the shooter is everything
-Versatile. Over they years, they have evolved into one of the most customizable weapon systems at their price point. Yes, the AR has a HOST of options for versatility, but at what cost in funds?
-CHEAP!

The not so practical, but key bits.
-Iconic. When someone sees an AK-47, even if they're not a gun person, they know what that gun can do. It's even featured on the flag of nations!
-Historic. This gun, like it or not, has liberated more nations than any other in history. Many in the US might not like that it was a tool for communist many times, but never the less it was the gun that allowed the people to overthrow dictators. Then again, it's also been used BY dictators against the same people who needed it. American forces may use the AR variants in their campaigns, but when a dictator or warlord is overthrown by the populace, the AK is the gun they reach for because it's cheap, available and proven. They know they can afford to fire it, get ammo for it, and that it will do so again and again considering their backs are against the wall
-Did I mention it's cheap?
-It's a masterwork design. Sure, it's not as refined as say a Ferrari, but there are those tools of human evolution that are so purpose built, that they simply cannot be replaced. The 1911 pistol? But there are sooooo many semi-auto pistols with advanced optics, polymer frames and what not...why use a gun that is over 100 years old in design? It works after being dropped in water, rolled in sand, and even thrown in a nuclear blast halo. Rolex? Who WINDS their watch when you have lithium batteries that last DECADES? Because it ALWAYS works, and doesn't need a manual to reset. How is it that a Japanese Katana or a Damascus Toledo Rapier can pierce Titanium and slice composite armour when our modern alloy-ceramic blades STILL can't do that? Because you sometimes hit the "sweet spot" in engineering where all the right parts come together, and while you can throw more technology at it, in the end, it's all based around the one that did it the best and STILL is doing it. We will be seeing 1911's and AK's even when we finally colonize space. Because they work.

I voted other because I own a Springfield m1a. More range, larger round. Also I don't own an ak or ar. If I had to choose, i would go with ak because of reliability. I've fired both and like the ar better, but they are too finicky. I got a chinese sks for something to shoot the communist 762 rounds. ak prices have gone through the roof in Arkansas. It did kinda break my heart to buy a rifle that wasn't American though. It's still America, for now.
Check into FN FAL, oldbikewrench, if you want an ar type to shoot 308. Expensive but worth it. They are very very nice.

Seeing as how it was supposed to be AR/AK, a FN/FAL, or G3, or anything else was out of the questioin. Wanting each of those myself, but knowing how expensive they are...
I shot my Yugo Underfolder AK, and yes, I will admit it isnt for everyone. The sheer simplicity of it being a "bullet thrower" from the get go still digs in people who own other weapons. I guess the OP should really want to say the whos/ hows/whys they chose only the AK/AR platform.
Some say a M14 type rifle would be best, others may say a G3 (HK-91) or others are best. Note they all have the NATO 7.62x51 cartridge: AND, peep sights.
AK, as well as SKSs' only have the simple blade sights.
Again, it depends on the OP's wishes and wants.

good point, i am one who perfers an m-14, mosin, sks, endfield style platform. respect your elders!

but to go out guns blazing id want an AR with a 50 round clip.

Shameless plug to HPFF:

http://hipointfirearmsforums.com/Forum/ ... 4&start=74

Yes, that was me shooting my Yugo underfolder out to 300 yards+

I will let you all know, that my lowly AR shot out that far as well, and mag for mag, matched the AK.
I was astonished as well, with the AR: I had a BUIS that I had NOT zeroed...and I was using it to hit that same metal plate.

GlockMan wrote:I voted AK, its proven battle capable, can be taken into just about any operational theater and keep firing, Low cost and built to last.

What he said.....

I should embellish the whole shoot a bit:

I shot my Underfolder Yugo AK out to that, no problem.
I shot my Ameetec AR with a NON ZEROED BUIS out to that same metal gong, and it hit just as effectively.
My Norinco SKS, still reached out there and rang that gong. Vid only hears by SKS Nature, how the shells eject up to the metal roof, and not the hits.

ALL 3 went out that far, with open sights.

What is my point? I have shot them all at the same range, at the same target, and they all functioned like they should.

AK. 'Nuff Said.

I chose other... My mini-14 is a hell of a fine weapon... And, as demonstrated around the world, the 5.56 can be an effective round as well...

The AR-15/M-16/M-4 gets a raw deal due to the continued use of double nitro-cellulose (ball) powder as the primary propellent for those weapons.

The original AR-15, as designed by Stoner, was equipped with a 1:14" twist barrel that allowed the 55-gr bullet to be fired to a max effective range of about 330 yds at a velocity of about 3150 fps. This gas operated rifle used Dupont's single nitro-cellulose (stick) powder to achieve this without the filthy residue left by ball powder ("Those men aren't keeping their rifles clean").

Before Army Ordinance got ahold of the AR-15, these weapons, used by 7 man squads, out performed eleven men squads equipped with M-14's, firing over 6,000 rounds BEFORE requiring maintenace to the weapon... Proven by the US Air Force, who bought 6,100 rifles and over 1,000,000 rounds of ammo to equip their troops in Nam (cir, 1962) and experienced over 5,200 rounds fired before maintenance (on Average) becoming necessary!

Army Ordinance only accepted the AR-15 AFTER modifying the barrel twist rate to 1:12" (500 yds), and increasing the velocity to 3,250 fps (requiring a shift to a different powder... Ball Powder). These changes cause several problems for the gas operated weapon... The ball powder continued to burn as the empty casing was being ejected from the chamber, causing fowling of the gas ports. The cyclic rate of the AR-15 was affected as well, increasing the rpm from a controllable 550 rpm to as much as 900 rpm!

In the Army's own test of the weapon, they found that the rifle would digest about 150 rounds and start to misfire due to fowling. The led to the third change of the rifle... Installing a Forward Assist lever... Something not needed on the original weapon.

The M-4 rifle used today by our forces are TO THIS DAY still using ball powder, still causing fowling to a much higher level than those weapons originally used by the Air Force back in 1962...

Special Forces units, being the best of the best, and allowed extra monies to aquire weapons and munitions, equipped themselves with ammunition loaded with Dupont's IMR powders. They also exibited lower maintenance issues than the Regular Army.

So, don't blame the AR for the problems foisted upon it by misuse from the Army Ordinance.

Purchase ammo that has single nitro-cellulose powder, and never use the forward assist again!

eldarbeast